Shanghai teens destroy U.S. in respected international standardized test

I didn’t see Kenya on that test score list. I’m sure it’s just an oversight.

RE: To make it fair you either need to get a representative Chinese sample, or else compare with the best America can offer.

Yes, and we’ve seen results akin to what you’re saying -— THE OLYMPICS.

But even here, it isn’t a very fair comparison — the Chinese gymnasts are GOVERNMENT SPONSORED from childhood. Many of them taken out of their families to LIVE, EAT, BREATHE the sport they were TRAINED to excel in.

Americans have to pay or be sponsored privately to excel in their sport.

Suffice it to say — I get your point. If you pick and choose the best people to take the test, you are most likely to score highly.

The true source of our decline is the leftists who have controlled the schools and the schools of education for generations now, and, of course, our willingness to offer our children up as living sacrifices to the abomination known as “public education” .

Agreed

RE: I didn’t see Kenya on that test score list. I’m sure it’s just an oversight.

For that matter, African, South American and Middle Eastern (i.e. Arab ) countries were not shown altogether.

For that matter, African, South American and Middle Eastern (i.e. Arab ) countries were not shown altogether.

I know, but it's my bad; probably should have affixed a sarcasm tag to my post. It was a diss of Dear Leader.

I am from East Africa, and my understanding is that the original meaning is a cat that has left the homestead. However, every African in the US uses the term, and they do not use it as an allusion to a peripatetic cat. Although to be honest the knife cuts both ways ....the only case of racism (if I can call it that) I ever experienced in the US was from an African-American. Thus I’d say both sides have no real love lost.

I’ve never even heard of this test.

I would really love to see those studies ...I was just telling someone earlier this week that I wish there was a study on twins - with one twin growing up in a really nice home (I do not mean two Hondas, a flat screen and a bi-yearly trip to DisneyWorld ...I mean wealthy, intelligent adoptive parents with a strong penchant for academics, etc) and the other growing up in a more eroded home (say, single mother, no real penchant for academics, a neighborhood where being smart is looked down upon and actively teased, and bringing home 27K a year). It would be interesting to see how the twins turned out.

I am not an expert in the subject by any measure, and what I was writing was simply my own personal experience plus observations I have seen in others. When I was very young I had some learning difficulties (stemming from a mix of factors: a. I was born lefthanded and made righthanded, which caused significant stuttering problems until I was in standard 4. b. I come from a multi-tribal background, and all sorts of languages were being spoken, which made me come up with a hybrid language). I had to drop out of school in standard 3 (grade 3), and my granny started from the start - with picture cards and all. However, instead of A is for Apple, B is for Boy, C is for Cat it was more like A is for Amorphous, B is for Bodacious, C is for Capricious, etc. When I went back to school in standard 4 it was a whole different game (I was actually far advanced), and I was able to take advantage of the opportunities I had. That is nurture ...without my granny I would have been put in a lower stream.

As I said, I am not an expert, but I think cultural influences and nurture play a huge part. A friend of mine who is an African-American professor in the US told me a story about her son. He was in grade school (cannot remember what grade, but it was probably 3 or 4). Her son was quite bright, and won some academic awards. When he went to pick up the award on the podium several African-American students in his class started mocking him for 'acting white.' His grades fell after that. I wonder whether that may influence what highschool he goes to, what university he goes to, what job he gets, etc. I'd say it would.

Going back to my example of Bill Gates and a drug kingpin in Calliope projects: Bill Gates is number 3 in the World's richest list. The Kingpin is number 1 in Calliope's richest list (say he is worth 3.5 million US liquid). Both are evidently intelligent (to actually make REAL money in drugs you have to be a good mix of intelligent, ruthless and focused ....many of the higher ups do not even consume their product - that's one of the rules of the drug trade, 'do not get high on your own supply'). However, compared to Bill Gates' billions, his 3.5m is paltry. However, let's have a thought experiment where Bill Gates was born in Calliope, and the drug guy was born in a more tony neighborhood.

I know from my experience that going to the right schools, having the 'right friends' and being associated with the 'right families,' having the right type of contacts, can directly mean a life of means and opulence. Another person can work extremely hard, be totally meticulous, and simply look forward to just a full-month's salary bonus at the end of the year. There is a reason why even though primary school education in Kenya is free of charge, some parents pay the equivalent of US$5,000 a month for a certain kindergarten (there is another one where you have to get on the waiting list when you start thinking of conceiving due to the waiting list - although that one is much cheaper than the above example - due to the fact that going to that kindergarten makes it easier to go to certain primary schools and secondary schools). In the US it is the same ...I remember that Frank Quattrone (a former analyst during the dot-com bubble days who was charged with financial fraud, but now has his own company) was doing improper things to try and get his kid into a certain school (or maybe it was Henry Blodget, another analyst from those days).

I guess it may also depend on what age the child gets adopted. If I adopt a kid who is 6 years old, the 'programming' has already been done. If I adopt a kid who is 6 months old, I can 'mold' the kid in a certain paradigm. Adopting a (say) Russian kid who is 10 years old has caused significant issues for the adoptive parents when the kid becomes quite disruptive and difficult (stemming from the harshness and hardships encountered during his/her first 10 years). Getting a baby who is just fresh off his/her swaddling clothes is a different thing, since you are inputing your principles and facets on a mind that has not been filled with other aspects and modes of thinking/behavior.

Thus, if the child had lived with its birth parents for a while (and they are poor with low to atrophied academic affinity), then goes to the Connecticut family I discussed on my other post when he is 5, then it may be too late. The formative years have already progressed quite a bit. However, if the Connecticut family takes the kid when he is 8-9 months old, then the child's first cognitive functionality would occur under the stewardship of the Connecticut family.

In my opinion, that may be the reason why the birth adoption studies you stated may show closer affinity to birth parents (or birth scenario/background) than to adoptive parents.

However, I am no expert on this matter. I do however strongly believe that if I was born in an African slum or an American ghetto I would not be where I am today (or may not even be alive), would not have gotten the education I received, nor exposed to the opportunities.